Friday, May 31, 2013

Transylvania University, one of Lexington and Kentucky's most valued longstanding institutions, is in crisis.

There
are a lot of facts in dispute regarding the words and actions of R.
Owen Williams in the three years since he took the helm.

This from Joel Pett

But one
fact that is not disputed is that last Friday, the faculty voted 68 to 7
— a ratio of 10 to 1 — that it has no confidence in Williams'
leadership.

No matter how you cut it, that's a crisis. It's a
crisis that the board of trustees must address thoughtfully, without
being defensive.

The board responded quickly with a vote of
confidence in Williams, and on Tuesday, board chairman W.T. Young Jr.
described the faculty vote as "an extreme and unwarranted position."

On
Wednesday, Young was a bit more conciliatory, calling on everyone to
work together and the faculty to give Williams another chance. He said
two committees, one on academic affairs and one on employee concerns,
will bring together trustees and faculty to work on the issues that have
arisen.

They will need to work hard and transparently, presenting serious solutions to serious concerns.

Both
the quick vote and the tough words suggest that the board feels it must
join Williams behind the barricades. If the committees are, or are even
seen as, ways to gloss over problems or buy time, the board will be
doing a disservice to Transylvania.

In any business, when 90
percent of those who have contact with customers to deliver the product
make public their lack of faith in management, there's a very serious
problem.

This is particularly true at a small school, where the
personal connection between teacher and student is fundamental. As
Transy notes on its website, "Transylvania professors know their
students by name and take a keen interest in their academic progress."

And
those professors aren't wild-eyed rebels, according to one of their
number, Rick Weber. He told Herald-Leader reporter Linda Blackford that
the faculty has traditionally been "cautious, quiet, even docile." As
problems multiplied, faculty attempted to address them first with
Williams and then the board, but they saw few changes, he said.

The
issue that brought the conflict into public view was a dispute over
tenure for two faculty members. But Williams' behavior toward faculty,
staff, students and alumni in multiple settings, as described in news
stories and individual accounts, raises broader questions.

Faculty
presented to the trustees accounts of intimidation, including shouting
at people and calling them disloyal. They offered examples of
denigrating faculty and students to their faces and to their peers.
There are accounts of crude or inappropriate remarks, particularly aimed
at female students, faculty and alumni.

These are grave charges that seem to indicate more than just cultural differences or the occasional remark taken out of context.

The
Transylvania board must exert its leadership and study them
dispassionately and thoroughly to find a productive way forward.

Wednesday, May 29, 2013

During the recent WLEX investigation of the Fayette County Public Schools Special Education Department the district credited Director Kathy Dykes for being forthright and honest; for admitting that she ditched one day [and then later amended her confession to one-half day] of a 2009 professional conference in Las Vegas. But her confession only came after WLEX was poised to expose the fact, which they did in a recent three-part series of stories titled: "Special Ed, Special Perks." Fayette County Schools Superintendent Tom Shelton diminished the severity of the offenses," but also said he did not want to "defend a
lapse in professional judgment demonstrated in these isolated incidents."

But were Dykes' lapses in professional judgement really isolated?

KSN&C has learned of two more instances where it appears that, instead of focusing on service to others, or protecting the professional integrity of the district by making the difficult choice, Dykes apparently chose to hold her breath, and cross her fingers, hoping that no one would further expose the shortcuts taken in her department. Unlike her Grand Canyon road trip, both of the other instances had potential repercussions for children (among them, some of Fayette County's most vulnerable students).

Fairness and Justice: The Heart of Due Process

About four years ago, a family with two special needs children moved to Kentucky. The children had already been progressing under an IEP from their former California school district. But upon arrival in Lexington, the parents learned that the Fayette County school district wanted to discontinue some of the children's services. The parents invoked the federal IDEA "stay put" provision. The "stay put" provision exists to maintain stability and continuity for the children. Under 20 USC § 1415(j) and 707 KAR 1:340 sec 12 (3), unless the local school district and parents agree, any student identified with a disability shall remain in his or her then-current educational placement.

But the district wanted to remove services. To resolve the matter, on June 15, 2010, the parents opted for a due process hearing under 707 KAR 1:340 sec 12. A Due Process Hearing is an adversarial administrative hearing used by KDE to resolve disputes in special education where a hearing officer (who is presumed to be impartial) hears matters of fact, and renders a decision. The dispute was styled XX v. Fayette County Board of Education, Agency Case 0910-[YY] (where XX is substituted for the child's initials, and YY for the case number). (Note: Although KSN&C is reporting this as though there was one case, there were actually two actions going on at the same time - one for each of two children.)

The parents claimed that the Fayette County Schools failed to provide their child with an IEP that included certain related services necessary for the child to receive a free and appropriate education as required under the law.

But on June 18, 2010, when Clinton "Dale" Kirk was named the Due Process Hearing Officer for the case, Dykes faced a moment of ethical conflict. She confided in Mike Muncy who served as a district special education administrator for elementary schools at the time.

"Kathy told me, she said, 'Well I don't know what I'm going to do. Dale Kirk is the hearing officer and I slept with him a few years ago,'" Muncy told KSN&C.

"She said, 'I don't know if I should let them know that or not. We're going to have a telephone conference, and I don't know if I should say that we need to get another hearing officer or not.' She said, 'I guess I'll just wait and see what Mr. Kirk says,'" Muncy said. "So they had their telephone conference. Ed Dove was their attorney. Bob Chenoweth was our attorney. The conference was over and she said, 'Well he never mentioned it, so I didn't bring it up.' And they started the hearing," Muncy said.

Kirk never mentioned it. Yet the rules of procedure in due process hearings specifically requires the parties to divulge any potential conflicts of interest during the initial telephone conference. According to Kirk's Order of Continuance, filed on August 17, 2010, "The purpose of the conference was for the hearing officer to divulge personal and professional information for the parties to determine if there was any reason Mr. Kirk should not hear the case."

Dykes and Kirk fail to divulge personal information

Dykes sat silently. Kirk never said, 'Oh, by the way, I had a very close personal relationship with the district's lead official a while back.' Their silence denied the parents a right that is fundamental to the process. Their silence denied them due process.

The motivating concern for any judicial proceeding is that all parties have confidence in the fairness of the process. Kirk and Dykes hid knowledge they were compelled to divulge, and the cost was that it denied the parents the opportunity to make a judgment about the hearing officer's fitness to hear the particular case, and ultimately, it cost the parents a fair hearing - not to mention whatever legal bills the family had amassed.

Over 22 months, the hearing plodded along with a formal resolution session, and further discussions of possible resolutions, to the deposing of out-of-state witnesses, to the filing of documents, and conference calls to the hearing officer informing him of the "progress or, more often, the lack of substantial progress" being made. The parents complained that the district was dragging their feet, while running up legal bills. KSN&C has been told that the case, which is not over, has already generated thousands of pages of documentation. During this time Kirk issued numerous orders and continuances. Finally on Thursday, April 9, 2012, "several substantive decisions were made" during a conference call with the parties, and August 20th was set to begin the hearing.

The Disaffection and Intervention of Mike Muncy

Mike Muncy would later complain that there "were a lot of sexual innuendos going on
in our office" and KSN&C has heard a few recordings that illustrate the very casual conversational tone that was
generally accepted in Dykes' presence - and was even promoted by Dykes herself. The atmosphere in the special education department apparently became uncomfortable for some employees, other than Muncy, who began recording conversations. The samples KSN&C became privy to were mostly bawdy, sophomoric, exchanges one might expect from...well, a sophomore boy. Breasts as flotation devices; getting it up... Think Bevis and Butthead, in drag, planning a special ed meeting.

But some of the "jokes" were not simply unprofessional, but also had implications for more important matters. On one recording shared with KSN&C (6/18/10), Dykes can be heard relating a conversation she had had to a small group. "I said, well, I found out who the hearing officer is this time. He' said, 'Yeah? Who.' I said 'Dale Kirk.' And he said, 'I wondered about that.' I said at the head [of the table] is going to be Dale Kirk, and I'm going to have Ed [Dove] pressuring me. I mean, we're going to have to buy a very special outfit for them," Dykes told the group.

Muncy further illustrated saying, "She went [into her office] and made a phone call, and
came back out into our middle room where we were having lunch. She says, 'Well, I called the hearing officer [Dale Kirk]. I had a question, and...he didn't answer, so I left a message. And I don't know if I should have said this or not, but I gave him my number and said, Give me a call over the weekend - if you're up to it.' And she winked at me, and smiled. She said, 'I probably shouldn't have said that,' and everybody started laughing."

Some KSN&C readers have asked how Dykes "could have been so stupid" as to post her unprofessional conference behavior on Facebook. One might also wonder how she could have been so unprofessional as to hide her conflict of interest, and then attempt to exploit it during a due process hearing.

By this point, it was clear to Muncy, as it was to others, that some rather inappropriate activities were becoming commonplace in the FCPS Special Education Department. And some would suggest that, although it might have been professional suicide, Muncy should have reported his concerns immediately. But he didn't. Neither did any of the other administrators who were well aware of how business was being conducted. To no one's surprise, everybody went along with the boss.

But that soon changed for Muncy when he started suffering from diabetes. Flare ups caused him to make trips to the emergency room, and he began missing work. A once-trusted lieutenant, his treatment at the hands of Dykes changed 180 degrees, and along with it, so did his attitude toward Dykes.

Muncy told KSN&C that he started getting angry emails from Dykes saying, 'I don't know where you're at, but you better get in here.'

Even before it turned sour for Muncy, Dykes had admitted to routinely targeting Muncy. In a recorded faculty meeting (1/20/11) that sounds more psychological than professional, Dykes said, "A lot of things don't bother me. When I feel it here, and Mike feels the lashing - [laughter] I target him for some reason. I go after our token male. [laughter] It must go back to something with male bashing a few years ago. [laughter] I've gotten over it, but anyway. [laughter] He's a good sport, [laughter] but that's a big issue I know."

But on April, 12, 2012, three days after Kirk set the date for the hearing, "I filed a letter through [attorney] Brenda Allen's office to Dr. Shelton," Muncy said, "alleging everything I knew about the corruption, and things going on that were inappropriate...I did an open records request, made these allegations, and let them know that Kathy had slept with that hearing officer. So after that letter, [the superintendent] must have met with Miss Dykes and Bob Chenoweth the school's attorney. He called the family, or Ed Dove's office and said, 'Mr. Muncy's made an allegation that there was inappropriate activity with this guy, Do you want to start a new hearing? Or do you want to continue?' The [father] said, 'I absolutely want a new hearing'."

Recusal

On June 5th, 2012, a Motion to Recuse was issued in the case, with the petitioner charging that "newly discovered evidence" was convincing, and that it was in everyone's best interest that Hearing Office Clinton Dale Kirk recuse himself.

After two years of delays and continuances in a case (two cases, actually) which Kirk admitted had already taken an "extremely long period of time," they were about to start over because every decision Kirk had made was now called into question.

Was Dykes successful in selecting just the right outfit? Was Kirk up for a weekend chat? How were the parents supposed to continue the process in good faith, when Kirk and Dykes had undermined that possibility?

By June 28, 2012, the process began again with a phone conference among the parties including Mike Wilson, the new hearing officer. In his first order, Wilson specifically confirmed that there were no longer any conflicts of interest.

Did Dyke's behavior constitute a breech of ethics? Apparently, the superintendent didn't think so. If he had determined that Kathy Dykes' conduct was dishonest, or her silence amounted to a willful disregard for the welfare of
others (particularly the children whose Due Process hearings were set back), or that it constituted a neglect of her duty to report the conflict of interest, or if she violated any administrative regulations related to the children's Due
Process hearing - then Superintendent Tom Shelton would have been required under KRS 161.120 to send a letter of notification to the Educational Professional Standards Board. KSN&C has been unable to confirm that any letter was sent regarding this incident.

Is the superintendent prepared to defend yet another
lapse in Kathy Dykes' professional judgment? Or is it possible that the superintendent was unaware of some of the facts being revealed in our investigation? When KSN&C asked the superintendent to confirm that letters were sent, Shelton said, "these matters are still under investigation."

Kirk

One might certainly argue that an even more serious obligation to report the conflict of interest lies with Kirk, as the hearing officer. If administrative judges cannot be trusted to act ethically, the administrative justice process is completely undermined. But Kirk was not a typical KDE employee. KDE Assistant General Counsel David Wickersham confirmed that "Mr.
Kirk was a Personal Service Contractor." As such he would not be fired for any bad acts, but his contract could be terminated, or he could be denied any further work - and the latter is apparently the course KDE chose. A KSN&C open records request produced evidence that KDE found the conflict of interest to be of sufficient concern that the department took action against Kirk. A letter from Amy Peabody of KDE's Office of Guiding Support Services to Kirk, referenced a conversation where he was told that he no longer met the requirements for employment. Still, during the next contract cycle, Kirk applied for more work as a hearing officer. On August 28, 2012 Peabody wrote to Kirk saying that "it was determined that you had an existing conflict with this work" and that he was therefore "ineligible for selection." Peabody cited the requirement that a hearing officer "not have a personal or professional interest that conflicts with your objectivity in any hearings" and that Kirk did not meet this mandatory requirement, as she had previously discussed with him.KDE spokeswoman Nancy Rodriguez told KSN&C that Dale Kirk no longer serves as a hearing officer for KDE.

Along the way, the parents' complaints about their treatment at the hands of the district mounted. "Every
once in a while, Kathy Dykes pulls my son's aide away," the father told
KSN&C. And apparently there is a new procedure, at least at one
school, that forbids instructional aides from speaking to parents?! The
parents believe this procedure was invoked because the aides were
telling the parents whenever the children's IEP was not being followed.

After speaking to several parents of special needs students, it seems that the way the collective group of "parents" figure it - the district has boundless resources, including legal services on retainer, a big liability insurance policy, and some amount of sovereign immunity. If the district wanted to deny services to children (due to budget constraints, or other reasons), even if it was illegal, most parents would be hard pressed to do much about it. In cases where parents are pressing for services and no "stay put" provisions apply, the district could essentially run out the clock with delays if they wanted to.

Another issue?

Surprisingly, Muncy does not place all, or perhaps even most of the blame on Kathy Dykes. Muncy believes the problems actually began with the questionable hiring of the high school special education administrator, Rachel Baker. When former administrator Beverly Henderson went to KDE on a two-year MOA [Memorandum of Agreement], Baker was hired as an interim. "But when the two-years were up, they just kept Rachel without advertising the position, or interviewing any other applicants, and she was hired without the proper certification," Muncy and other former FCPS sources allege.

"Rachel started as an intern. The first year was real slow and smooth, but as time went on she became bolder and bolder, and just basically tried to run the department," Muncy said. Another source opined, "[Dykes] was a small town girl who came here with a big dream. She saw that
she was ill-equipped for the job, so she latched onto [stronger
individuals] to ride with them, and try to stay on the job."

Muncy [and two other FCPS Special Education Department employees who spoke to KSN&C on condition of anonymity] said there was an 18-month to two-year delay between the time Baker completed her course work [for a Director of Special Education certificate] and when she became certified [7/10/09]. But Dykes apparently wanted Baker in the position, and so she faced another decision that tested her ethics.

"[Baker] was having difficulty getting a transcript from the University of Kentucky. In the meantime, she was working in a job that required a certificate for Director of Special Ed, but she can't get a transcript, which means that she can't get a certificate," one source told KSN&C. "I said something to Kathy Dykes about that. How dare Rachel put the district in a position of working as a special ed administrator for high schools, without the certification to do the job?" Well, Miss Kathy went and told Rachel what I said, and that's when hell broke loose," the source said.

Muncy said she was "going to these ARC meetings with demanding parents,
and telling them flat-out, 'No' on stuff, making decisions...but not having the qualifications." What if someone complained? Dykes allegedly responded to the concerns saying, 'Well I thought about that. I guess I would just tell them that she had completed her coursework, and just didn't have her certificate.'

Suddenly Dykes began placing restrictions on Muncy regarding who he could speak with, or have lunch with, and under what conditions. He was told to distance himself from the individual who had questioned Baker's certification. Childish retaliations began to occur, like no more invitations to eat lunch together as they had done for years. "During happy-hour at Sonic, they'd go out and get a 'Freezie'...for everybody but us. And this happened almost every day," Muncy said. Think Bevis and Butthead, in drag, at Sonic.

Muncy said it didn't help that Rachel bragged about being recruited to go to Nashville with the Scholastic Rep, which Muncy considered a kickback for all of the business FCPS had just done with the company. "The conference was about RtI (Response to Intervention)," Muncy said. "If anybody should have been going, it should have been Diane Shuffet," who was in charge of that concern.

Post Script

KSN&C met with Kathy Dykes during the time of the WLEX investigative reporting, to review some evidence that Dykes had hoped would prove she only ditched the conference for half of the day, instead of the whole day. A binder with a set of notes from the Las Vegas conference was presented. Nice, but, suffice it to say the "evidence" was not conclusive of anything related to her attendance because there is no way to confirm when such notes were made.

But this grown up version of "skipping school" is a relatively minor offense. It is embarrassing that she posted her playtime on Facebook, and that it came to light while the superintendent was being entertained in Australia by the Gates Foundation. This will, no doubt, give rise to new inquiries from state auditors wanting to better understand the nature of funded travel and whether that can be considered a kickback. It may cause the board of education to begin adding up the number of days certain administrators are away from their posts. It might spawn significant headaches for the district. But blowing off some portion of a conference? Who hasn't done that? The last sessions of the last day of a conference are almost always poorly attended.

As a disciplinary matter, it seems the 'ethics' charges are far more damning. At least, they ought to be, because they are about services to kids. These are the moments when a district demonstrates it's commitments to children, or to adults. The public can tell by observing who is protected in the process?

During our meeting, KSN&C invited Dykes to comment for the record. She declined. After a few minutes, Dykes was called out of the office, and when she returned she informed KSN&C that she had been directed not to make any comments at all, and that if we had questions they should be directed to the superintendent.

KSN&C first began looking into issues related to the FCPS Special Education Department about ten weeks ago after being contacted by Mr. Muncy and some parents. In preparing this story KSN&C spoke to, or otherwise communicated with, about a dozen parents of special needs children, along with a handful of former and current FCPS special education department administrators and staff. Due process hearing documents have been examined and in some cases open records requests have been made. We communicated with Leigh Searcy, compared notes, and followed the WLEX reporting.

And, of course, Mike Muncy decided to go "on the record" and we interviewed him and reviewed a number of documents, recordings, and even a funny photo of one special ed department employee asleep at his desk. (We didn't run it because it has nothing to do with this story.)

Some will dismiss Muncy as being disgruntled. So be it. He was allowed to sit at the cool kids table as long as he went along with the boss and took her jabs. But when that changed, and the jabs were no longer in jest, Muncy no longer felt obliged to take Dykes' petty abuse and keep her secrets at the same time. So he spilled the beans. If that's all it was, I might be inclined to dismiss him too. But Muncy came with documents. That's why WLEX believed him. I would have been inclined to believe him anyway, having known him to be reliable from my time in FCPS. But it was the corroborating documentation that made this story possible.

I was in attendance during the last FCPS Sp Ed Advisory Committee meeting, which, despite the fact that Dr Shelton's recent letters about the WLEX investigation of Dykes were on the agenda, no one offered a word, or asked a single question about the issue. Of course, Ms. Dykes, who ran the meeting, only gave folks about 3 seconds to respond before moving on to the next item. But I got the sense that everyone in the room, parents and administrators alike, we're relieved that no one said anything. They quickly resumed their pleasantries. If there is to be public accountability for the misdeeds of FCPS special education administrators, it will come from somewhere else.

If this is how this story ends, it will be a shame. If parents remain neutered, passive recipients of whatever help the district deins to provide their children; if the superintendent finds no fault in the behavior documented herein; if the servant leadership vision he is quick to espouse is in fact only a slogan; then it will be a shame for Fayette County special needs children and the district at large.

When Fayette County Special Education Director Kathy Dykes has faced
decisions that test her professional ethics, she seems to consistently fall short of the ethical standard set for teachers and other educational
professionals certified in the state of Kentucky. If the district fails to provide a strong response to these short-comings it will set a new, and lower, standard for leadership behavior in the entire district.

Especially now that Dr. Karen Frohoff has rejoined the district, it is abundantly clear that the wrong person is in charge.

The faculty of Transylvania University has taken a vote of
no confidence in the leadership of President Owen Williams, the first
such vote in the school's history.

But the university's trustees
are standing behind the leader they chose in 2010, announcing Tuesday
that they took a unanimous vote of confidence in Williams after the
faculty vote.

Both sides, faculty and trustees, decided to keep their Friday votes quiet until after Saturday's graduation ceremonies.

The
faculty voted 68 to 7 Friday morning, according to documents obtained
Tuesday by the Lexington Herald-Leader. The resolution stated: "We have
NO CONFIDENCE in the ability of R. Owen Williams to continue to serve as
president of our institution." The vote centers around a recent tenure
decision, as well as Williams' leadership and management styles for the
past three years.

The past, current and future presiding officers of the faculty released a statement Tuesday afternoon about the situation.

"Over
the last three years we have made measured judgments and taken careful
steps to address the problems created by Dr. Williams' leadership," said
the statement from professors Judy Jones, Melissa Fortner and Ben
Hawkins. "We find ourselves very distressed to be in this situation; it
is only because of the extreme nature of these failures of leadership
that we find it necessary to take a vote of no confidence, an action
unprecedented at Transylvania."

The faculty also voted to
recommend that tenure be retroactively granted to two faculty members
whose tenure was deferred by Williams.

That decision by Williams
brought into the open the simmering conflict between the president and
the faculty and students earlier this spring. The dispute led to a
protest April 5 by students, who demanded better communication with the
administration.

Faculty representatives have given some trustees a
document outlining many of their complaints against Williams, including
aggressive behavior toward faculty and students that "creates a
community of fear rather than a community of engagement and creativity,"
the document said. "Numerous faculty and staff alike report feeling
fearful for their job."

The document also cites Williams' perceived difficulties with women and a "chilly climate" on campus toward women.

"While
the tenure decisions are indeed recent examples of unjustified and
irresponsible decision-making, our concerns range widely, from an
increasingly hostile campus environment for faculty, staff, and students
to questionable and ineffective management," the faculty statement
said. "Our vote was the culmination of three years of fruitless attempts
to work with Dr. Williams to remedy these problems."

The tenure
decision appeared to be the last straw for faculty because, the document
said, Williams changed the rules midstream about what was required for
tenure. Although the two professors had received recommendations from
all the required committees, Williams said they now had to be published
in peer-reviewed publications. That was not part of the tenure
requirements at the time.

"In making his decision to defer tenure
to two highly esteemed members of the faculty, President Williams
ignored the overwhelming recommendations of the faculty, and the strong
recommendations of the Personnel Committee, which were based on a wealth
of evidence that both faculty members had earned tenure," the document
said. The faculty was "dismayed that the President would then move so
hastily and capriciously to apply new standards at this time, and in
such a way that threaten both a fine colleague's career and the
functioning of the university."

On Friday, the trustees decided
not to intervene in the tenure decision. They did, however, appoint an
ad hoc committee on employee concerns.

"The board of trustees has
one overriding mission," board chairman W.T. Young Jr. said in a
statement, "and that is to make Transylvania the best educational
institution it can be. Doing so places demands on all of us — students,
professors, administrators and trustees. I am disappointed, frankly,
that the faculty has taken a no-confidence vote. In my view, this is an
extreme and unwarranted position.

"At the same time, I respect the
absolutely crucial role of the faculty. My intention is to support its
efforts to make the university even better than it already is. My hope
is that in the months to come we can work collegially toward the goals
we all share."

The faculty representatives said they were "deeply
disappointed" in Young's statement, "that despite the amount and the
gravity of information we provided to him and other members of the Board
of Trustees ... he chose to characterize our actions as 'extreme and
unwarranted.'"

No-confidence votes in academia are symbolic
rather than binding, but they usually serve as a wake-up call to severe
tensions on a campus, said John Thelin, a higher-education historian at
the University of Kentucky.

"It's very symbolic," Thelin said. "My impression is that it's often dangerous because it often backfires."

Thelin
mentioned New York University, where there have been several
no-confidence votes in President John Sexton in the past two years,
although he has kept his job. "It brought into the open this really sad
rift between trustees and the faculty."

The larger problem, Thelin
and others have said, is the decline of shared governance — the concept
of faculty, staff and the administration governing universities
together. Most university governing boards — including Transy — are
mostly filled with people from the corporate world, where shared
governance is "very alien," Thelin said. Faculty find themselves shut
out of many decisions made by upper administrators.

"I think shared governance is very fragile," he said.

The
trustees clearly like Williams' vision of putting Transy among the top
50 liberal arts colleges in the nation by 2020. On Friday, they also
voted to support Transy's strategic plan. It would increase the student
body from 1,100 to 1,500 and the faculty from 100 to 125.

Williams
came to Transylvania in 2010 after careers as a Wall Street banker and a
Civil War scholar at Yale. He has launched ambitious plans for the
1,070-student school, including expanding and improving its student
body, curriculum and physical plant.

The Clark County Board of Education voted to
move ahead with a controversial district facilities plan Tuesday night,
ceding to a state ultimatum to proceed or risk losing education funding.

Board
members voted 3-2 to adopt a resolution pledging to move the facilities
plan forward "with all possible haste," as the state had demanded.

They
also gave the go-ahead to plan for renovations of Clark Middle School
and the old George Rogers Clark High School in preparation for
implementing the plan.

However, members agreed in a series of
split votes to reduce the amount earmarked for the George Rogers Clark
renovation from $16.5 million to $8.4 million. The amount planned for
Clark Middle's renovation would remain at $2 million. The renovations
are to prepare for a merger of county middle schools as called for in
the facilities plan.

That move to reduce the amount allocated for
the renovations came at the suggestion of board chairman Michael Kuduk,
who questioned allocating $18.5 million to prepare for a middle school
merger that is opposed by many county residents. If the plan ultimately
goes through, it would be easy to increase the allocation later, Kuduk
said.

It wasn't immediately clear, however, whether the reduced amount will satisfy state officials.

The facilities plan has been on the books since 2007, but has been opposed by some Clark County residents since the beginning.

Things
came to a head earlier this year, after a new majority on the school
board voted to delay part of the facilities plan for a year, and then
declined to approved money for the renovations at Clark Middle and the
George Rogers Clark building.

However, state Education
Commissioner Terry Holliday wrote Clark board members last week, stating
that they had to start moving ahead with the facilities plan at their
Tuesday night meeting, or face possible forfeiture of monthly state
funding to the school district.

Holliday noted in his letter that
the approved facilities plan is legally binding, and that the state
already has committed about $21.9 million toward implementing the plan.

Tuesday
night's actions still leaves the school board facing several other
deadlines mandated by Holliday, any one of which could trigger funding
forfeiture if they are not met...

Sunday, May 26, 2013

Just as the K-12 system
uses Title I money to provide extra educational support for kids from
disadvantaged backgrounds, a new report calls for innovative programs
and big changes in the way higher education is funded to create a more
level playing field for students from poor and minority families.

The group details the growing stratification in American higher
education, with more low-income students attending two-year schools that
have lower graduation rates, compared with four-year universities where
students tend to be wealthier and more likely to complete. According to
the report, financial support for community colleges has not kept up
with the need, which the task force argues is greater because students
generally do not enter as prepared academically as those at more
selective four-year schools.

Students enroll in community colleges with high hopes, but often
struggle. While about 81 percent of students entering community college
for the first time say they eventually want to transfer and earn at
least a bachelor's degree, just 12 percent actually do so within six
years, the report found.

Among low-income students with high academic qualifications for
college, 69 percent who went to a four-year institution earned a
bachelor's degree compared with 19 percent who started at a community
college.

Campus diversity varies widely by the type of institution. The report
finds that high-socioeconomic students outnumber low-socioeconomic
students 14 to 1 in the most competitive four-year institutions, while
low-SES students outnumber high-SES students in community colleges
nearly 2 to 1. The report calls for four-year colleges to do more to
reach out to more low-income applicants and for community colleges to
try to attract students from more affluent backgrounds in an effort to
diversify campuses.

Adding to the problem of completion at two-year schools is the lack of funding.

The report notes that community colleges received $8,594 per student
in 2009 from federal, state, and local government sources, while public
research institutions received $16,966. The amount of money spent on
instruction at community colleges was about $5,000 per student in 2009,
compared with $10,000 at public research universities and $20,000 at
private research universities, the report says.

"A central problem is that two-year colleges are asked to educate
those students with the greatest needs, using the least funds, and in
increasingly separate and unequal institutions," the report says.

"Our
higher education system, like the larger society, is growing more and
more unequal. We need radical innovations that redesign institutions and
provide necessary funding tied to performance."

The report includes a number of proposed strategies to promote
greater diversity across all higher education institutions and promote
completion rates among disadvantaged students.

1. Adopt state and federal adequacy-based funding similar to that
used in primary and secondary education, linking support with outcomes.

3. Encourage closer connections between community colleges and universities.

4. Take steps to improve transfers from community colleges to four-year institutions.

5. Encourage innovation in racially and economically inclusive community college honors programs.

6. Support more early-college programs that promote community college diversity.

7. Prioritize funding of new programs for economically and racially isolated community colleges.

8. Provide incentives for four-year institutions to engage in affirmative action for low-income students of all races.

"Efforts to make inequalities in higher education funding more
transparent, coupled with legal and public-policy efforts to level-up
public funding of community colleges, should make it possible to improve
the quality of community colleges," the report concludes.

I certainly agree that teaching critical thinking skills is vital to our future prosperity. Perhaps we should start with the Senate.

There may be a few climate change deniers who claim to be scientists, but there is actually little scientific debate. Humans have impacted the Earth's ecology greatly and our children need us to understand this impact sooner rather than later.

Next
Generation Science Standards were released April 9. They are based on
the Framework for K-12 Science Education, developed by the National
Research Council.

Sen. Mike Wilson

The standards place
substantial emphasis on teaching climate change and there is
considerable discussion describing human activities as major factors in
global warming. There has been barely any mention in the local papers
about this issue that will have long-lasting impact on the way our
children are educated beyond a self-important swipe from the C-J
Editorial Board.

The following are two statements from the NGSS:

•
“Human activities, such as release of greenhouse gases from burning
fossil fuels, are major factors in the current rise in Earth’s mean
surface temperature.”

•
“Outcomes predicted by global climate models strongly depend of the
amounts of human-generated greenhouse gases added to the atmosphere each
year.”

The
National Research Council appears to be carving out positions and
expressing the beliefs of U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate
Change.

There are
those in the scientific field who question the beliefs of the
Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. A statement signed by 16
scientists listed several stubborn scientific facts contradicting the
Intergovernmental Panel’s beliefs. Perhaps the most inconvenient fact is
the lack of global warming for well over a decade and the
smaller-than-predicted amount of warming over the 22 years since the
Intergovernmental Panel began issuing projections.

Another
area of contention is evolution. The standards make it clear that
evolution is fundamental to understanding the life sciences. Generally,
the standards focus on changes in gene pools, genetic mutations and
effects of the environment on changes within species. The controversy
arises with the statement that “Students can evaluate evidence of the
conditions that may result in new species and understand the role of
genetic variation in natural selection.” This is supposition and implies
that one species may evolve into a different species. There is no
factual evidence that this has ever occurred and to suppose that it
happens is counter to the beliefs of many Kentuckians.

Standards
should encourage teachers to create and foster an environment that
promotes critical thinking skills, logical analysis, and open and
objective discussion of the advantages and disadvantages of multiple
theories.

As
chairman of the Education Committee and someone who supported the goals
of Senate Bill 1, I would ask that these requirements be thoroughly and
impartially reviewed and vetted. Political correctness bears watching
and should never be the arbiter of learning.

Rep. Derrick Graham, D-Frankfort

Kentucky House leaders on Friday appointed Frankfort Democrat Derrick
Graham as the new chairman of the House Education Committee.

Graham,
who recently retired as a social studies teacher at Frankfort High
School, has served in the House since 2003. He has been a member of the
Education Committee and has served as chairman of the budget
subcommittee on primary and secondary education.

House
Speaker Greg Stumbo, D-Prestonsburg, said Graham “has dedicated his
life to education and has a deep understanding of the challenges and
opportunities Kentucky faces academically.”

Graham
replaces Carl Rollins, a Midway Democrat, who recently resigned his
House seat to take a job heading Kentucky’s student financial aid
agencies.

Friday, May 24, 2013

Secrecy at public college fuels distrust

There is nothing wrong with the fact that Eastern Kentucky
University is taking a long, careful look at how to best use its
resources.

That's the responsible thing to do periodically, to
re-examine programs and spending to be sure they reflect the
university's goals and mission.

Like all change, though, this entails an element of uncertainty, and with it fear.

Everyone
knows that public universities aren't magically going to see more tax
dollars coming their way, so one program's growth could mean another's
demise.

And that's one of the biggest problems with the secretive approach EKU has used to sort things out: it fuels fear and distrust.

A
22-member task force has been meeting behind closed doors for three
months. The Board of Regents also met in private April 30 and will again
next month when the task force presents its recommendations.

Regents
chairman Craig Turner told Herald-Leader reporter Linda Blackford that
the point of this exercise is to "get everybody going in one direction
in a vision that says the key is for Eastern to get better."

However,
that's going to be tough since the faculty and staff have largely been
excluded from participating in building the vision or having any input
into the direction.

It's also troubling that EKU, which has
already gained a black eye in terms of openness by pursuing,
unsuccessfully and at great expense, a long legal fight to keep
information about the firing of the manager of its new performing arts
center out of public view, is again trying to keep its public business
private.

That skates too close to violating Kentucky's freedom of
information statutes, as First Amendment lawyer Jon Fleischaker told
Blackford.

"I think the idea that a public university can treat
itself like a private corporation when they're dealing with public
dollars is inappropriate and it's against the law," Fleischaker said.

This
is all doubly concerning because a new president, Michael Benson, will
take over at EKU August 1 from retiring Doug Whitlock, who set this
budget examination in motion in February.

Benson has been kept apprised of the task force's work and has approved the changes made so far.

It
will be tough for Benson to get buy-in from a faculty and staff that
have been shut out of the process. We hope Benson will make it a first
order of business to change the administrative culture at EKU to one
that respects both the campus community and the law, by sharing as much
information as possible.

Thursday, May 23, 2013

Kentucky Education Commissioner Terry Holliday has warned
the Clark County Board of Education that it must start implementing the
district's controversial facilities plan immediately or risk losing
state education funding.

Ed Commish Terry Holliday

Clark County Board Chairman Michael Kuduk
said Wednesday that he isn't happy with what he described as a
"threat." But he said the school board probably will have to comply.

Board
members previously had ordered a one-year delay in a one plan provision
calling for merger of the county's two middle schools. Last month, they
also rejected to two related projects: renovations at Clark Middle
School and the old George Rogers Clark High School.

But a bluntly
worded email message that Holliday sent to board members on Tuesday
appeared to leave them no choice but to backtrack.

Holliday listed
seven steps that he said members must take to move the facilities plan
forward, starting at their May 28 meeting.

The board must adopt a
resolution in support of the facilities plan at that meeting, Holiday
said, and go ahead with the middle school and high school renovations.
Five other deadlines would follow, continuing into next school year,
according to the commissioner's letter.

Holliday warned that "if
at any time any deadline ... is not met, this will be considered a
violation of the legally approved (facilities plan) and the Clark County
School District will forfeit receipt of its monthly SEEK payments from
the state immediately."

It may be the first time the state has threatened to hold back a district's SEEK funding.

SEEK,
the basic state program for supporting Kentucky public schools,
provides between $17 and $19 million for the Clark Schools each year,
according to Kuduk. That's over half the district budget.
"They've
threatened to pull SEEK funding, and if they did we wouldn't be able to
make payroll," Kuduk said Wednesday. "That's a pretty horrible thing to
threaten.

"I've talked to some people here since Tuesday who are
saying this is almost tatamount to state control of the district," Kuduk
said. "It's pretty much a state mandate that I think goes against the
wishes of the community."

Holliday said in his message that the
facilities plan must proceed since it has been approved by both the
Clark school board and the Kentucky Board of Education.

He also
noted that the state has provided about $21.9 million toward
implementing the plan, and has "relied upon the good faith of the local
board to carry out this legally binding plan according to statutory and
regulatory requirements."

But some county residents have opposed
the plan since the Clark board first approved it in 2007 and reapproved
it last year. Some residents filed a lawsuit attempting to block the
plan several years ago, but lost.

The proposal calls for multiple
steps: consolidation of Clark middle schools; closing several small
elementary schools; and converting some other schools to fill new rolls.
The old George Rogers Clark high school would become a middle school,
for example, while existing middle schools would convert to be
elementary schools. Some elementary schools scheduled to close have been
listed among Kentucky's oldest and most decrepit schools.

Plan
opponents counter, however, that many of the old schools have some of
the state's high tests scores. Others maintain that converting the
almost 50-year-old George Rogers Clark high school building into a
middle school would be a waste. And many argue that merging Clark
County's two middle school into one building inevitably would harm
academics.

Kuduk said Wednesday that he's received a petition
signed by more than 100 families who say they would leave the community
if Clark middle schools are merged.

Leonard Shortridge, one of the
Clark County residents who filed the unsuccessful lawsuit against the
facilities plan several years ago, said Wednesday that members of the
community simply don't want it.

"They (state officials) are trying
to push things on us that we don't want, and they've been doing that
for the last six years or so," he said. "The whole point is parents
don't want this. Taxpayers really don't want it, the ones that know
what's going on."

Meanwhile, Associate State Education
Commissioner Hiren Desai said Clark County School Board members still
could seek to amend the facilities plan if they choose.

However,
state regulations allow for amendments only under specified conditions,
such as a change in enrollment or curriculum, a natural disaster or
other unforeseen circumstances.

Wednesday, May 22, 2013

In February, Eastern Kentucky University President Doug
Whitlock made a startling announcement: The Richmond university would
set aside $23 million, or 10 percent of its budget, to fund new programs
and raise salaries.

This "reallocation" meant cuts for many existing programs, raising plenty of concerns and questions among faculty and staff.

Whitlock
appointed a Strategic Budget Reallocation Task Force, made up of
administrators and the chairwoman of the faculty senate, to recommend
what should get cut. It has met behind closed doors for the past three
months.

Blocking the press and public from listening to the group's debate has increased anxiety on campus, some faculty say.

"This
has been a strange process from my point of view," said Matthew
Winslow, a psychology professor who has been at EKU for 15 years. "It
seems to me it was sort of thrust upon us without any of our input and
without much of an explanation, and it was never explained to us why it
had to be done."

The Board of Regents also met behind closed doors
on April 30 to discuss possible layoffs due to the reallocation,
Chairman Craig Turner said Wednesday in an interview. The closed-door
session was allowed under the Open Meetings Act because they were
talking about specific people who might lose their jobs, Turner said.

First Amendment lawyer Jon Fleischaker disagrees with that interpretation of the law.

"You
can't talk about general personnel matters under the guise of talking
about individuals and that appears to be what they're doing," he said.

Secrecy is often a problem when publicly-funded universities must make painful financial decisions, he said.

"I
think the idea that a public university can treat itself like a private
corporation when they're dealing with public dollars is inappropriate
and it's against the law," Fleischaker said. "When you're talking about a
process and the need to cut dollars, that deals with all sorts of
policy issues that deal with public education and that should be done
publicly. Everything they're doing affects the public education process
and to suggest it is a private matter simply to me suggest they don't
understand their function."

Turner defended the university's process, saying "it's all about transparency."

"All
we're trying to do is to figure out how we can be proactive in meeting
the needs of the students as education changes," he said.

The
22-member task force is made up mostly of deans and at least two faculty
members. They have gathered information from their units, Turner said,
and together with the president, will make recommendations to the Board
of Regents at its June 14 meeting. No public forums or other public
discussions of the recommendations are planned.

Some faculty were
able to communicate their individual or departmental concerns through
colleagues on the committee, said Richard Day, a professor in the
College of Education.

"It was the kind of situation where people
had to comment without knowing what was on the radar screen, other than
everything," Day said. "I think faculty and staff have not had the
amount of information they desired."

Faculty Senate Chairwoman
Sheila Pressley, a member of the task force, did not respond to requests
for comment from the Herald-Leader.

A few of the group's early
proposals were announced May 10, the night before First Lady Michelle
Obama made a commencement speech at EKU, by incoming President Michael
Benson. He will replace the retiring Whitlock on Aug. 1.

Benson has been kept aware of the committee's decisions, and signs off on them, said EKU Spokesman Marc Whitt.

Among
other things, Benson said EKU was considering reorganizing its
offerings at regional satellite campuses; increasing tuition at Model
Laboratory School, the K-12 school on EKU's campus; cutting athletics
spending by 10 percent; and instituting a parking fee for faculty and
staff.

On Tuesday, officials announced that 127 people had been
approved for voluntary buyouts, although officials would not say if the
move would save enough money to avoid layoffs.

Many of the
vacated positions will be filled, creating a net loss of fewer than 10
positions out of 3,800 employees, Turner said Wednesday.

When
asked why that information had not previously been made public to
assuage campus fears, Turner said the task force report was still in
draft form.

"This is the first time we've done it," Turner said
of the reallocation. "The first time probably creates more questions
because it has not been done before."

Turner said the ultimate
goal is to "get everybody going in one direction in a vision that says
the key is for Eastern to get better." Improving, Turner said, would
probably involve upgrading Eastern's core schools, such as nursing,
education, and justice and safety.

Broadcasting professor John
Taylor, a former faculty senate chairman who has worked on past
strategic planning and budget committees at EKU, said it's not evident
to him what if any new mission EKU will have moving forward.

"The mission has not been clearly communicated," he said.

Taylor
called the university's slow, extended release of information about the
reallocation "tortuous." He also said a rush to finalize all the
changes before the new fiscal year on June 31 would preclude meaningful
discussion on campus.

"You need time to vet it to faculty, students, staff, even alumni," he said.

Still, most faculty will probably judge the reallocation process and Benson based on the final outcome, said Richard Day.

"There
is some anxiety about what will happen," Day said, but if Benson can
boost salaries and start major fundraising, "I think all will be
forgiven."

Tuesday, May 21, 2013

During the last few weeks,
each Work Unit has been charged with reviewing Positions and structure as part
of the strategic reallocation process at EKU. The Strategic Budget
Reallocation Task Force members have been involved with the review and
development of the Work Unit reorganization plans. These plans have been
approved by President Whitlock and President-elect Benson.

The result of this review
is a revised organizational chart for many Work Units reflecting the Positions
that will exist in the Work Unit following the reorganization. This
chart lists Position titles and reporting relationships only, and not employee
names, at this point in the process. The Task Force anticipates that
these reorganization plans will be ready for communication within the
University on Tuesday, May 21, 2013, as part of the overall reorganization
timeline shown below. This timeline includes information about when
and how Position vacancies will be announced within Work Units and to the
campus as a whole.

Now, as always, Eastern
Kentucky University is committed to and employs strategies for ensuring equal
opportunity in the University’s workforce. We are an Equal Employment
Opportunity and Affirmative Action institution that values diversity in its
faculty, staff, and student body. In keeping with this commitment, the
University welcomes applications for available Positions from diverse
candidates and candidates who support diversity, upholds the right of
individuals to treatment on a non-discriminatory basis, and ensures
organizational processes that maximize the potential of all individuals by
valuing inclusion of individual differences. These are proactive concepts
that imply aggressive, vigorous, and systematic activities to achieve equality
and equity for all. To uphold these commitments, the University
will follow documented employment processes as the planned reorganizations are
implemented.

At this time, the plan is
to complete internal moves within Work Units during the week of May 21 through
a streamlined employment process. Your supervisor will be providing you
with information as to how to express interest in
available Positions within the Work Unit. You will need to
provide a current copy of your résumé to your Work Unit supervisor.
Please update your résumé now to be sure that it contains all of your work
history, education, and other qualifications.

Following these internal
moves, all remaining vacant Positions will be posted on May 29through
EKU’s Online Employment System (OES). All presently employed regular
full-time or part-time benefitted employees can apply for
consideration for any of the Positions. This process will work just like
all regular job postings at EKU. As part of this process, an internal Job
Fair, attended by representatives of the Work Units that have Position
vacancies, will be held on May 30; more details on this event will be
provided.

If you have questions
regarding these processes, you should contact your Supervisor or a member of
the Human Resource staff.

Reorganization Timeline

Date

Event

May 20

Last day to
revoke application/acceptance into VBP

May 21

Announce
Work Unit internal reorganization plan within Work Unit

May 22-24

Application,
Interview Period , and Selection

·Employees within the Work Unit
express interest and submit qualifications to managers via a letter of intent
and résumé or
application

·Managers hold interviews with the
most qualified applicants

·Managers provide complete
documentation regarding selections and placements to HR for review and
approval using attached form

·HR makes compensation
recommendations as applicable and sends to managers

·Mangers offer positions to employees

May 28

Employment
Plans are due to HR

·Internal selections
& justification

·Vacancy list &
Position descriptions

May 29

May 30

·All vacancies are posted
campus-wide for Internal Candidates Only

·E-mail sent to affected
employees with vacant position list & application instructions

KSN&C

KSN&C

KSN&C is intended to be a place for well-reasoned civil discourse...not to suggest that we don’t appreciate the witty retort or pithy observation. Have at it. But we do not invite the anonymous flaming too often found in social media these days. This is a destination for folks to state your name and speak your piece.

It is important to note that, while the Moderator serves as Faculty Regent for Eastern Kentucky University, all comments offered by the Moderator on KSN&C are his own opinions and do not necessarily represent the views of the Board of Regents, the university administration, faculty, or any members of the university community.

On KSN&C, all authors are responsible for their own comments. See full disclaimer at the bottom of the page.

Why This Blog?

So far as we know, we only get one lifetime. So, when I "retired" in 2004, after 31-years in public education I wanted to do something different. I wanted to teach, write and become a student again. I have since spent a decade in higher ed.

I have listened to so many commentaries over the years about what should be done to improve Kentucky's schools - written largely by folks who have never tried to manage a classroom, run a school, or close an achievement gap. I came to believe that I might have something to offer.

I moved, in 1985, from suburban northern Kentucky to what was then the state’s flagship district - Fayette County. I have had a unique set of experiences to accompany my journey through KERA’s implementation. I have seen children grow to graduate and lead successful lives. I have seen them go to jail and I have seen them die. I have been amazed by brilliant teachers, dismayed by impassive bureaucrats, disappointed by politicians and uplifted by some of Kentucky’s finest school children. When I am not complaining about it, I will attest that public school administration is critically important work.

Democracy is run by those who show up. In our system of government every citizen has a voice, but only if they choose to use it.

This blog is totally independent; not supported or sponsored by any institution or political organization. I will make every effort to fully cite (or link to) my sources. Please address any concerns to the author.

On the campaign trail...with my wife Rita

An action shot: The Principal...as a much younger man.

Faculty Senate Chair

Serving as Mace Bearer during the Inauguration of Michael T. Benson as EKU's 12th president.

Teaching

EDF 203 in EKU's one-room schoolhouse.

Professin'

Lecturing on the history of Berea College to Berea faculty and staff, 2014.

Faculty Regent

One in a long series of meetings. 2016

KSN&C StatCounter

Disclaimer:

By accessing this website (http://theprincipal.blogspot.com) Kentucky School News and Commentary (hereafter KSN&C), a web browser (hereafter user) consents that she or he is familiar with, understands and absolutely accepts the following weblog disclaimer:

The views expressed by the authors and contributors on this website do not necessarily reflect the views of Kentucky School News and Commentary, those who link to this website, the author’s employers, mothers, fathers, sisters, brothers, other ancestors, blood-relatives, progeny, this website’s web host, moderator, designer, or any other organization in any way connected with this website.

While I presently serve as Chair of the Eastern Kentucky University Faculty Senate (August 2014-May 2016), none of the Moderator's comments are official statements attributable to EKU, its Faculty Senate or any of the institution's entities.

In all cases, comments are the personal views of the author. No individual contributor, author or commenter is paid for their opinion or beholden to a particular point of view. All contributors write in the English language and cannot be held responsible for unfortunate translations that may occur in other languages. KSN&C is not responsible for human errors involving grammar and punctuation.

Comments on this website are the sole responsibility of the author. The author assumes full responsibility, liability, and blame for any libel or litigation that may result from something written in or as a direct result of something written in a comment. The accuracy, completeness, veracity, honesty, exactitude, factuality and politeness of comments are not guaranteed. The content on the blog is not intended to malign any religious, ethnic group, club, organization, company or individual. Readers are advised to employ a healthy dose of rationality. Furthermore, information is always in transition. Web links change, and content published today may be out-of-date next week.

Readers are advised that some images used on the site are not the property of KSN&C but are reduced in size and used under fair-use. The same is true of certain copyrighted material. Any concerns should be addressed to the moderator. Due to the episodic nature of the blog, errors, when pointed out, may not be immediately corrected.

All trademarks, service marks, copyrights, registered names, mottos, logos, insignias and marks used or cited by this website are the property of their respective owners and this website in no way accepts any responsibility for an infringement on any of the above.

Despite any claims to the contrary, nothing on this website should be construed as professional advice. The information provided on this website is of a general, wide-ranging nature and cannot substitute for the advice of a licensed legal professional, physician, psychiatrist or member of the clergy. A competent authority with specialized knowledge operating within the Kentucky Department of Education, local public school district, church school, independent private school, home school, or in the journalistic, law enforcement or legal community is the only one who can address or comment on the specific circumstances covered in the news and commented upon herein. For personal advice, please contact your mother, father, BFF, local bar association, local bar tender, law society, medical board, county hospital, pastor, teacher, phone book, online directory, local emergency number in your jurisdiction, or Google to find a or obtain a referral to a competent professional.

This website has no control over the information you access via outbound link(s) in the post text, sidebar, header, footer or comment sections. This website does not endorse linked websites and cannot guarantee the accuracy of any information found by following said links or the correctness of any analysis found therein and should not be held responsible for it or the consequences of a user’s use of that information. In fact, we’re pretty sure we link to falsehoods perpetrated by others with some frequency. Be warned. Twistifications of supposed facts, biased reporting, and bad analysis is de rigueur for some of the sites we link.

This website may inadvertently link to content that is vacuous, obscene, venomous, frivolous, rotten, antagonistic, harsh, rancorous, acrimonious or repetitive. This website in no way condones, endorses or takes responsibility for such content. Please report anything really ugly to KSN&C’s Moderator.

This website publishes content regularly and said content is maintained in reference to the protections afforded it under local, state, martial, federal, international and school yard law. Publication of information found on this website may be in violation of the laws of the city, county, state, country or other jurisdiction from where you are viewing this website’s content and laws in your jurisdiction may not protect or allow the same kinds of speech or distribution. In the case that the laws of the jurisdiction where this website's content is maintained and those of yours conflict, this website does not encourage, condone, facilitate, recommend or protect the violation of any laws and cannot be responsible for any violations of such laws. We do condone lawful efforts to extend free speech protections to all parts of the world.

Because the World Wide Web is an integrated net of communication, discussion and litigation, this website encourages the distribution of its content. Cross, reciprocal or just plain friendly hyper-linking is consistent with this information sharing and this disclaimer should not be construed as a condemnation of any linking practices. That said, any reproduction of this website’s content must credit the website by name and Uniform Resource Locator (URL). Should you link to this domain or use, reproduce, republish, reiterate, imitate, or duplicate the information contained on this website, you alone are responsible for that action and should, under threat of litigation, credit this website by name and URL. In addition, any user who learns of information from this site, but traces back to our attributed sources in an effort to forego proper mention of KSN&C should seek therapy.

This website is not recommended for inmates, ingrates, illiterates, or anyone professing an irrational fear of CATS or any other mammal, or those who have a penchant for bullying or self- aggrandizement. Women who are pregnant or may become pregnant or are nursing are advised to consult their physician before reading this website. Eating before reading may result in indigestion. This website contains small pieces and is not recommended for children under the age of 4.